Mr. Ken Helm <br />October 25, 2013 <br />Page Three <br />"The applicant's survey shows that the portion of Oakleigh Lane abutting the subject <br />property has 20 feet of right-of-way width, with approximately 19 feet of pavement <br />width that partially overlaps the north boundary of the subject property, outside the <br />public right-of-way." (page 12)- <br />The issue was also addressed extensively in the Eugene Public Works Referral Response, dated <br />September 17, 2013 (pages 2, 3, 5, 7,10,17 and 20). The report confirms the current Oakleigh <br />Lane right-of-way: <br />"The existing right-of-way in Oakleigh Lane is 20', which was dedicated by the properties <br />to the north per the Plat of Oakleigh in 1927. Staff notes that the southerly margin of. <br />this 1927 dedication forms the centerline of Oakleigh Lane and that any additional <br />dedications would necessarily be based on this centerline." (page 10) <br />Thus, none of the evidence submitted on October 16, 2013 can be justified based on being <br />responsive to anew issue regarding Oakleigh Lane's current right-of-way. <br />As described in the following sections, none of the evidence submitted on October 16, 2013 can <br />be justified based. on being responsive to new evidence submitted after the'public hearing. <br />OMC_PDT 13-1-Access Engineering Letter2.pdf <br />This letter from Access Engineering contains the following statement of fact: <br />"However, there are properties that have dedicated additional right-of-way: tax lot 6401 <br />has dedicated additional right-of-way to 25 feet south of the centerline and tax lots <br />4400.and 4500 have dedicated right-of-way to 30 feet north of the centerline. This is a <br />common occurrence throughout the River Road area where former County roads have <br />been annexed into the City." <br />This introduction of new evidence is prefaced by the following statement: <br />"I am writing this letter in support of the proposed Oakleigh Meadows Co-housing <br />development in response to testimony submitted on October 9, 2013 by Mr. Paul Conte. <br />Mr. Conte asserts that Oakleigh Lane is classified as an `access lane' because the right- <br />of-way is 20 feet north of the centerline implying that the total right-of-way was <br />planned to be 40 feet in width." <br />Thus, the only justification provided for submitting new evidence of right-of-way dedications is <br />"in response to testimony" that I submitted on October 9. The only evidence pointed to in this <br />j ustification is "the right-of-way is 20 feet north of the centerline." <br />However, my testimony did not include new evidence related to Oakleigh Lane's current right- <br />of-way width. Although my October 9, 2013 referenced evidence that Oakleigh Lane's current <br />right-of-way is 20 feet north of the centerline, my reference was explicitly to testimony <br />submitted into thO record prior to the public hearing. <br />430 <br />